stamps to the amount of 30,000 dollars a year would be dispersed at that office. This, at four per cent., would afford a commission of 1,200 dollars, and to give this sum to an officer who already reSceives 5,165 dollars, would, in his opinion, be quite wrong.

If it would be in order, Mr. G. said, he would move to strike out the words, "and Inspectors," in order to confine this provision to Supervisors, and then that the section should read, "that the following sums shall be allowed for clerk-hire, in addition to the sums already allowed ;" and in the next place, provide, "that the Supervisors and Inspectors of Surveys shall be severally allowed upon all stamp duttes and fines per cent."

Mr. G. agreed with the gentleman from Massachusetts that it would be better to allow these officers salaries, than to pay them by way of commission.

Mr. Oris said, that the calculations of the gentleman from Pennsylvania did not differ materially from those which are on the table, except that, in order to appreciate the salary of the Supervisor of Pennsylvania, he has taken the amount of taxes for the last two years, instead of taking an average for several years back. The true way of ascertaining the amount of this gentleman's compensation, is to take it from the statement on the table, by which it appears that his nett allowance, after all the expenses of his office are deducted, is from 1,200 to 1,500 dollars a year. This sum could not be thought too much. If the plan which the gendeman proposes had been the original plan, Mr. O. did not know that he should have objected to it; but, to adopt a new principle at this time, would only produce unnecessary delay; and the expense to the Union, in the plan of the gentleman, would be as great as the one now proposed. At the next session of Congress, he supposed more correct information on this subject will be laid before the House, and a plan of giving adequate salaries, instead of commissions, might be adopted. Mr. HARPER was sorry that the chairman of the committee who reported this bill, did not concur in the idea suggested by the gentleman from Pennsylvania. It seemed obvious to him that a rate per cent. cannot be an equal or proper mode of compensation for these officers; because whether 30,000 dollars or 10,000 dollars are collected in an | office, the trouble will be pretty much the same; as the delivering of a stamp, at a dollar, is as soon performed as the delivering of one of five cents. He did not think four per cent. would be too much in any of the States, deducting for clerk-hire, but he was satisfied it would be far too little in the smaller States.

Mr. S. SMITH said, the amendment proposed by the gentleman from Pennsylvania, and recommended by the gentleman from South Carolina, might have been proper, if it had not been for the aw of last session, making an allowance for clerk ire, which he supposed would be sufficient for he stamp duties also, and he believed if this course vas taken, the expense would be much more than our per cent.; for if, said he, we look to the State of New Hampshire, it will be found that the

whole amount of duty there collected is only $520; and if $400 be allowed to the Supervisor of that district for a clerk, it will swallow nearly the whole amount. He believed it would be best to go on at present with the mode proposed by the gentleman from Massachusetts. At the next session, when further information is before the House, a different course may be taken. With respect to the amount of duties collected in Pennsylvania, as he knew that State had been deficient in making its returns for several years past, the two last years might include some of those deficiencies. He believed it was bad policy to starve the public officers; he wished them to be enabled to live decently and respectably. If not, men might come into office who would pay themselves.

Mr. HARPER said, since the question must be first taken on the amount of commission to be allowed, he should be in favor of the sum proposed. He believed the gentleman from Pennsylvania had erred with respect to the present emoluments received by the Supervisors in the several States. A striking instance of this error appeared in the statement made as to the Supervisor of South Carolina. Mr. H. said he had before him an authentic statement of the emoluments received by that officer for seven years past, including everything which had been allowed to him, and making deductions for clerk hire, office rent, stationery, &c., and his clear annual allowance, from the year 1791 to 1798, has been no more than $448 and 61 cents. This year, on account of an allowance for clerk-hire, and a commission upon the direct tax, his emoluments would be considerably increased. He supposed he would receive something more than $800 clear. This sum, for an officer who is obliged to live in Charleston, must be acknowledged to be too small; and if, said he, we persist in this course, our choice of men must be confined to men of fortune, without respect to industry and abilities.

Mr. OTIS said, that though the Commissioner of the Revenue had omitted to notice the land tax in his statement, he had mentioned it in a note.

Mr. MCDOWELL said, though he acknowledged it to be important that the office of Supervisor should be filled by men of integrity, yet he thought it would be impolitic and improper to increase their emoluments in any material degree at present. So far as he was acquainted, the salaries of these officers had been found adequate. Last year an allowance of clerk-hire had been made, and he thought four per cent. on the stamp duties would be too great an addition to their present emoluments.

The motion on filling the blank with four per. cent. was carried-40 to 38.

The blank for allowing Supervisors a commission on money received from the Collectors was filled with one per cent., and that for compensating the Inspectors of Surveys with 14 per cent. An amendment was also agreed to excluding bonds from the operation of the clause in favor of 60 day notes; and another making an allowance for defaced stamps. The committee had leave to sit again.

H. OF R.]

NORTHWESTERN LANDS.

Stamp Duties.

On motion of Mr. KITTERA, a commitee was appointed to consider whether any and what amendments are necessary in the law for the sale of the United States' lands northwest of the Ohio.

A report was laid before the House from the Treasury Department, respecting the value of goods. imported into the United States.

THURSDAY, January 31.

A bill from the Senate for the relief of Thomas Lewis, was read and committed.

On motion of Mr. HARPER, the Committee of the Whole, to whom was referred the bill to regulate and fix the compensation of clerks, was discharged from a further consideration of it, and it was recommitted to the Committee of Ways and

Means, in order to undergo some alterations.

A Message was received from the President of United States, enclosing a report from the Director of the Mint, with a statement of the coinage of the Mint for the last year. Both these communications were ordered to be printed.

ALIEN AND SEDITION LAW.

Mr. HARTLEY presented a number of petitions (copies of each other) from the county of York, signed by upwards of 1,800 persons, complaining against several laws passed at the last session, particularly against the law for raising a provisional army, the alien and sedition laws, the stamp act, and the direct tax law, and praying for a repeal of them; and, also, that such a system of economy may be adopted by the Government, as will comport with its dignity, and prove agreeable to the people at large.

[JANUARY, 179

excluding bonds, at or within 60 days, from t exception in favor of notes of this descriptio Mr. GALLATIN hoped it would not be agreed Mr. GORDON also spoke against it, and Mr. Bå ARD in its favor. It was negatived, 26 votes on being in its favor.

On the other amendment of Mr. Oris, prop ing that defaced stamps should be allowed for, M WALN said if it were agreed to, it would oper door for fraud. One of the principal reasons w notes at or under 60 days were made to pay a le duty than others, was, because a number of stam used in this way would be necessarily defaced merchants drawing notes which never would discounted. Mr. W. had no doubt that in par cular instances individuals might suffer fro stamps being accidentally defaced; but he h lieved if this provision passed, all the 60 day no not discounted would be included within it.

Mr. S. SMITH was also opposed to it; and t amendment was negatived without a dissenti voice.

On the amendment to fill the blank allowing compensation to supervisors for stamping a selling stamps with four per cent.

It h

Mr. GALLATIN said, he hoped it would not agreed to. In relation to the Supervisor of Charl ton, whose case the gentleman from South Ca lina had introduced to the view of the Committ of the Whole, he would say a few words. been stated that his nett compensation at prese including his commission on stamps and the rect tax, would not exceed $800. In order make that statement, he has deducted all the i crease of office rent and clerk hire which w arise from the increase of duty, and, of course, i stead of $900, which were the expenses of Mr. H. hoped, as this petition was couched in office in 1798, he has charged $1,500 in 1799. decent and proper terms, no objection would be examining the credit account, Mr. G. was st made to its reference. He hoped also that its mer-prised to see the manner in which the supervis its would be duly considered, and, upon a full discussion of the subject, he had on doubt the petitioners would be satisfied with the result. He moved the usual reference, which was agreed to.

Mr. HANNA presented petitions from the county of Dauphin, in the same words with those from York county, signed by 504 persons; and

Mr. GALLATIN presented a petition and remonstrance from Washington county, signed by 1,544 persons, of a similar nature with the above; which had also the same reference.

STAMP DUTIES.

had stated it. Though the amount of comm sion arising from duties collected for the two k years were, as stated by himself, in 1797, $1,51 in 1798, $1,500; yet he makes his estimate at twel hundred dollars, which is three hundred dolla less than his real receipts. He has also stated i commission upon stamps at one hundred dolla The amount of duties collected on stamps 1 something less than six months is $5.201. Su posing the amount for twelve months to be t thousand dollars, at four per cent., his emolume would be four hundred dollars. Add to this o per cent. upon other stamp duties received fro the collectors, and, instead of the supervisor 1 ceiving $800, it would be found he would recei at least $1,500.

The House again resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole on the bill to amend the stamp act; when Mr. OTIS proposed a new section to the bill, providing that every certificate of stock in Mr. G. said, he yesterday stated to the Co any bank or insurance company, above one hun-mittee of the Whole the amount of emolume dred and not exceeding four hundred dollars, shall pay the sum of 25 cents, and all above $400, an additional duty of five cents for every $100, in lieu of the present duty. The motion was negatived44 to 27.

The committee then rose, and the House took up the amendments. When that was come to, which was yesterday introduced by Mr. OTIs, for

received by the different supervisors of the Unit States. There was one item, however, which could not take into consideration, because the was no return before the House from which could take it. This was the allowance upon ce tificates for wines, &c., which, as stated by th Supervisor of South Carolina himself, was, in th year 1796, $241; in 1797, $293; in 1798, $26

This amount will, of course, be considerably larger in the cities of New York and Philadelphia than in Charleston. He supposed in these towns six or seven hundred dollars would accrue to the supervisor from this source.

Mr. G. regretted that the House had not yet had laid before it an annual return on this subject, directed to be laid before them in the month of December. If that was before them, he apprehended very different conclusions might be drawn from it, from what can be drawn from less authentic sources.

In relation to the Supervisor of this State, he had yesterday stated that his emoluments are $5,165, including what will arise from the land tax. To this sum must be added about $750, arising from certificates; also the allowance on the stamp duties, which, if they amount to thirtysix thousand dollars a year, will, at four per cent., amount to upwards of $1,400, and also one per cent. upon stamp duties received from the collectors, which, he supposed, would leave another one hundred dollars, making the whole of the emoluments of this office $7,400.

alone.

What are the expenses of this officer? We have not these from himself, but from a clerk in his office. Clerks and office rent are estimated at $1,500; and that an additional clerk will be necessary on account of the stamp duty, so that, allowing this clerk to be necessary, nine hundred dollars a year will be cleared from these stamps He supposed his emoluments would amount to a nett $4,000 a year This officer, said Mr. G., does not live wholly in this city, and his expenses ought not to be calculated as being obliged to live here; and if he pays a larger sum for clerk hire, because he is himself absent, this expense ought not to induce a larger aliowance. He had no doubt the office is well kept; he mentioned this circumstance only because it will certainly be necessary to pay more for clerks when the supervisor himself is not present, than if he was to attend his duty himself.

This remark Mr. G. believed applicable to most of the large States. He did not know that it was necessary for these officers to live in large cities, as a great portion of the internal duties is not collected there. Residing in cities is, therefore, a matter of choice with supervisors.

[H. of R.

With respect to the stamp tax, Mr. G. said, no tax could be collected cheaper than it, being a mere matter of sale and receipt of money. Accordingly we find, when this law passed, it was supposed that the duty could be collected for five per cent., and yet we now find six per cent. given to the collectors, one per cent. to the supervisor, and one and a-half per cent. to the inspector.

Mr. G. said, his great objection to this amendment was its inequality. He hoped it would, therefore, be rejected, and a more equal principle be introduced in its place.

Mr. Oris believed the gentleman from Pennsylvania would not again have troubled the House on this subject, unless he had flattered himself that some gentlemen who represent some of the smaller States had been affected by the wish which he had expressed, of increasing the compensation of the officers of those States; but, seeing this, though his object is very different, for he believed it was to starve the officers of all the States, he had again brought the matter before the House. The gentleman complains of want of information. Have not the supervisors from different parts of the Union petitioned the House for two years past, and sent statements of their accounts? and the Secretary of the Treasury has singled out these officers as not being sufficiently paid, and as being unable to support themselves without an advance of pay. What says the gentleman from Pennsylvania to this? He says it is all loose information, and that the statements which he gives to the House are only to be depended upon. Allow him his own data, and he will make results; but Mr. O. believed the proper data was the information received from the Secretary of the Treasury.

With respect to the error of the Supervisor of South Carolina, he could not correct it; but he believed that gentleman incapable of such inconsistency as the gentleman has stated. He supposed the supervisor had drawn his statement from correct data, and the gentleman from Pennsylvania had taken his from what he guesses to be correct. Yesterday, the gentleman told the committee that the Supervisor of this State is in the receipt of emoluments from his office of a clear $3,000 a year; to-day he says it is $4,000; and there could be little doubt. if this subject enThis morning, said Mr. G., we have had pre-gaged the House a few days longer, he would sented a petition from York county, in which bring irrefragable proof that it is $10,000. complaint is made against certain taxes, with which, however, he had no doubt they would cheerfully acquiesce, if they were convinced that they are necessary; but, at the time they pray that a system of economy may be adopted, he did not think it would be good policy, or that it would ncrease their affection for the law, to tell them on the same day that their petition is presented hat we are about to allow four per cent. on the ollection of the stamp duty; that in so doing the reatest inequality would be produced between e allowance made to the officers of large and of mall States. To do this might induce an opinn that taxes are raised for the sake of giving rge salaries to those who collect them.

But we have, said Mr. O., a return from this officer himself, and he tells you that, exclusively of the stamp duty, it is from twelve to fifteen hundred dollars. But the gentleman states that this account is not given by himself, but by a clerk. Can we have better information, said Mr. O., than that of the clerk who keeps the accounts of the office? Mr. O. denied that it was likely the stamp duty in the Supervisor's office in this State would be $36,000 a year, though it had been $18,000 in the first six months, owing to circumstances which had already been mentioned. Perhaps, however, it might be $30,000, which would produce $1,200, at four per cent.; and it appears that the clerk hire in this business had taken the whole of this,

H. OF R.]

Stamp Duties.

[JANUARY, 1799. 1

so that nothing remains for the supervisor but one glance indirectly at the manner in which the busiper cent. upon the money received from the col-ness of that office is done; and as that gentleman lectors, which would not produce more than a frequently told the House he does nothing without nett sum of $80 or $100. a reason, he could see no other reason he could have had for it.

From the manner in which the gentleman had spoken of the Supervisor of Pennsylvania, it would almost seem that he had some personal dislike to him. This officer, said Mr. O., is compelled to go to and from the city; and, if he employs a capable person in his office, it is not material whether he be himself there, or in his own county, lulling those disquietudes which have been industriously raised among a set of people who are well disposed towards this Government; for his own part, he should be inclined to pay him better on this

account.

With respect to the Supervisor of South Carolina having taken $1,200 as an average, it was not an error, but the average allowance received from 1791 to 1798. He may, indeed, have been wrong in not having taken the average of the three or four last past years, instead of the seven. He believed himself this would have been most proper. What is the result? That $300 ought to be added to the $800 which he had stated to be the amount of his emoluments, which would make $1,100, which he was sure could not be thought a sufficient allowance for such an officer. But the gentleman says, the Supervisor ought to have added $400 more for the stamp duties, and $100 as arising from moneys received by the collectors. Was he to blame for not having done this, when he did not know what would be allowed?

With regard to the complaints of the people, he had the same idea with the gentleman from Pennsylvania of them-that they are unreasonable; since the taxes which are laid are unavoidable, and fairly and equally imposed, and are for the support of the liberty and independence of the country. Mr. O. said he would not inquire into the origin [Mr. GALLATIN said he did not say he was to of these petitions. In some instances, they doubt-blame on this account, but for having stated at less arose from an examination of the subject; but $1,200 what he must know ought to have been in others, they are the work of malcontents, who $1,500.] complain because they are disposed to make difficulties; and too many follow these file-leaders, and sign petitions and remonstrances, which, if he mistook not, they would hereafter, when they see matters in their true light, be glad to unsay and contradict.

Mr. HARTLEY said if all the statements which his colleague (Mr. GALLATIN) had made were like that which related to the residence of the Supervisor of Pennsylvania, they would be indeed incorrect; for though the family of that gentleman lives at Yorktown, he was himself four-fifths of his time in this city. This officer, Mr. H. said, had much disagreeable duty to perform, and he was sure that his constituents would wish him to be well paid.

No, Mr. H. said, the gentleman did not blame him alone, but everybody else must do it from the manner in which the gentleman expressed himself. We contend, said Mr. H., that 4 per cent. ought to be allowed, and the gentleman from Pennsylvania calculates what he would receive, if this was the case, but himself opposes it. He hoped 4 per cent. would be allowed.

Mr. PINCKNEY wished to say a word or two with respect to what had fallen from the gentleman from Pennsylvania. There might have been an error in judgment, in the Supervisor of South Carolina, in taking the average which he had taken; but if reference was had to what he has actually received for his services, it will be found he has by Mr. HARPER observed that there was nothing no means received an adequate allowance; and on new in the remarks of the gentleman from Penn- that account, said Mr. P., we ought rather to go besylvania, except two points, one of which was rela-yond what may be strictly a sufficient allowance, tive to the residence of Supervisors, and the other to the statement of the officer of South Carolina. He says these officers are not obliged by law to reside in large towns; but, said Mr. H., the law gives them duties to perform which makes it necessary for them to spend the greater part of their time there; and the gentleman cannot suppose that the Supervisor of this State would be constantly riding backward and forward between York county and this city, if he was not obliged to keep his office. If the residence of the family of this gentleman in the country proves anything, it proves that his office will not support them in town, and that his compensation ought to be increased. Could it be supposed that the Supervisor of Maryland had made inroads upon his fortune from his desire to live in the city of Baltimore, though his duty did not require it? Certainly not. Mr. H. could not see why the gentleman from Pennsylvania should have stated to the House, that when the Commissioner of the Revenue sent to the office of the Supervisor he was not in town, except it was to

in order to make amends for past deficiencies. In time past it appears his emoluments have only been from $700 to $800 a year, and the utmost allowance now proposed is $1,500; and he asked whether any man could support a family for less than this in the city of Charleston? He thought he ought at least to have $2,000. He conceived it bad policy to withhold a competent allowance from the officers of the public. As to the commission arising from the direct tax, it ought not to be taken into consideration as a permament allowance, as it was only laid for one year, and no one could say it would be continued.

Mr. GALLATIN insisted that the statements he had
made were taken from official documents. And
to show that the allowance to the Supervisor of this
State was what he had mentioned, he enumerated
the items as follows:
Salary

Allowance for clerk-hire
Commission from duty on distilled
sprits

$1,200

800 1,744

Stamp Duties.